Franklin v. Morgan Properties Corp et al

Filing 48

ORDER directing Plaintiff to advise the court whether or not he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to the motion by December 5, 2022. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, the undersi gned will recommend this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Response to Motion due by 12/5/2022. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges on 11/21/2022. (lbak)

3:22-cv-00737-MGL-SVH

Date Filed 11/21/22

Entry Number 48

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Keith Donald Franklin,
Plaintiff,
v.
Morgan Properties Payroll
Services,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 3:22-737-MGL-SVH

ORDER

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action
against defendant Morgan Properties Payroll Services. On October 12, 2022,
Defendant filed a motion to dismiss as a sanction for Plaintiff’s alleged failure
to meaningfully participate in discovery. [ECF No. 43]. As Plaintiff is
proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison,
528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising him of the importance of the motion and
of the need for him to file an adequate response by November 14, 2022. [ECF
No. 44]. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond
adequately, the motion may be granted.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the
court’s Roseboro order, Plaintiff failed to respond to Defendant’s motion. As
such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to
abandon his claims against Defendant. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is

3:22-cv-00737-MGL-SVH

Date Filed 11/21/22

Entry Number 48

Page 2 of 2

directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and
to file a response to the motion by December 5, 2022. Plaintiff is further advised
that if he fails to respond, the undersigned will recommend this case be
dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th
Cir. 1978); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 21, 2022
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2